ABINAVA DHARMA SIVACHARIAR SIDARKALANA AIYRA VAISYA BERI CHETTY SANGAM Vs. COMMISSIONER HR AND CE ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge made in W. P. No. 45548 of 2002 dated 18. 9. 2003, wherein the writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed.

(2.) IN the writ petition, appellant/writ petitioner has challenged the show cause notice dated 4. 12. 2002 calling upon him to state as to why an Executive Officer should not be appointed for the Sri Kandasamy @ Muthukumarasamy Temple, Rasappa Chetty Street, Chennai-3, and the appellant was directed to appear before the Commissioner on 27. 12. 2002 for enquiry with suitable reply. The said show cause notice was issued under section 45 (1) of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. The reason stated in the show cause notice is that the accounts of the temple were audited by the Audit Wing of the department and the audit reports issued for the Faslis 1407, 1408 and 1409 indicate that there are some irregularities committed by the Board and the Commissioner has several reasons to believe that the affairs of the temple are not properly looked after; the income and expenditure statement are not properly maintained; the buildings belonging to the temple are not fixed with new rents; the Trust Board on its own accord increased the rent; the change of tenancy done without obtaining permission from the Commissioner; and in certain items of expenditure permission of the Commissioner not obtained. It is stated in the notice that the Commissioner found that there is every reason to believe that there are adequate grounds to come to the conclusion about the irregularities and to rectify the errors it is proposed to appoint an Executive Officer under section 45 (1) of the HRandce Act, 1959.

(3.) THE learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition at the admission stage itself, reserving liberty to the appellant to file his objection to the show cause notice and granted 15 days time to file the objections by order dated 13. 1. 2003. Having not satisfied with the said order, this writ appeal is preferred by the writ petitioner.